[QUOTE=Apples;281413]I was quoting H2G2, hope it didnt mess up yar brain too much, I’m sorry sorry sorry
Peace[/QUOTE]
That’s popular enough that I was actually agreeing with you in the wrong tone I guess. You gave the standard pop culture “no one knows or cares” answer which fits here.
With the information that’s already available, I think I can come up with a suitable answer.
In Brink, when building a character, you really have 2 options. You can either specialize or be a jack-of-all-trades. So, if you specialize in a single class, you would be able to operate to a greater capacity while in that class, but once you change to a different class (you probably will have to at some point), you lose much of the finesse your build grants you in your main class.
Now, if you decide to create a more balanced character, you will never shine as brightly when forced into a niche role as someone who has specialized for that niche. However, you will perform better when operating outside your comfort zone than any specialized build could hope to.
TL;DR: There shouldn’t be any optimal builds.
From the way they’ve described things, assuming the abilities are in fact unbalanced enough to make finding an “optimal” build worthwhile, and assuming that all players create only single-class characters, there will be a minimum of 2 optimal builds for each class.
This is because there will be at least 1 optimal build when you’re a heavy, and at least 1 OTHER optimal build when you’re Light - and these builds WILL be different.
Medium characters will be a balanced middle-ground, able to use either build less effectively than the size it’s designed for, but better able to limit its weaknesses - they MAY produce a third totally different optimal build, OR allow a blending of both extreme-end builds to work as well as either one does on its own.
Considering the fact that you’ll also be able to multi-spec a character by taking class-specific abilities for any number of different classes, you should be able to fairly easily create (as I intend to) a dual-class Operative/Medic who can function effectively in BOTH roles. Because of the possibility of making one class or the other a “main,” this will allow a minimum of 6 optimal builds for each dual-class character, 2 for each body type. Potentially 9 if giving both classes equal value is a viable option as well.
But I’m assuming that Splash Damage know what they’re doing, and that different builds will have a paper/scissors/rock type interaction where any combination of abilities can be countered by a player with a different set.
EDIT: My last paragraph can basically be taken as a slightly longer version of Mr. Magikarp’s tl;dr
What about an optimal build for medium? I guess they might not get one due to their “middle of the road” approach.
That’s totally wrong. You can over-specialize, or you can be a jack of two or more trades.
There’s 19 or 20 abilities (whether or not you get a token for level 1 is technically debatable, though unlikely) and 10 abilities per class, with the exception of Operative and Soldier, who have 11, as well as 10 general abilities.
That means if you bought EVERY SINGLE POINT in one class, and EVERY SINGLE POINT in general abilities, you would be one short. The suggestion that you need, or even can use every single point in one class and general abilities is silly. You would have to assume that some are for all intents and purposes mutually exclusive (Cortex Bomb & Downed Fire, for instance, or Molotov & Grenade Shooting).
Once you’ve decided that you might put points into another class, then you start asking the question “how many?” You could have a minor secondary with a split like… 8/8/3, or you could have a major secondary, like 7/6/6.
Then you have the question of “what if you don’t want to specialize,” which presents the question of 3 classes or 4, and how much you want to specialize, and if you want any general abilities at all, so you could decide on 3 classes and still get variations like
5/5/5/5, or 10/4/3/3 with 10 general, or 10/4/3/3 with 1 specialized class and 2 minor secondaries, or you could have 7/6/6 with no general abilities at all.
To suggest there’s only two choices is silly.
Well I was suggesting as far as “optimal builds” go. To be frank I’m hoping that there ends up being no such thing.
I was suggesting that based on the abilities we’ve seen so far, it can be assumed that some, if not many, are not useful to all players. For instance, “Sense of Perspective” simply isn’t important to me. If I screwed up, I’m not fast enough to notice and respond any better than if I just get shot from behind and have to turn on the enemy to save myself. If you assume that, even a “specialized” optimal build will have SOME points in another class.
They’ve stated in one of the newer interviews “You have 20 levels, so you can get 20 abilities” - and the “rank” lists on the official site work from level 0. In older interviews about tutorials, one says you can “get to level two” from the tutorials and another says you can “get to level two” by watching them - if both are correct, you start off at level 0, and work from there. Meaning 20 upgrades if level 20 is the cap.
I’m going with 20 being the correct figure.
Also, I’ve read there are a confirmed total of 58 abilities, and they said “almost 60” in one of the latest videos.
You’re assuming there are 52 abilities, only 10 of which are universal. There are 16 universal abilities - so you CAN max out on a single class and top up with universal abilities. You could technically take ONE ability for each class and the rest universal and max out (assuming there’s only one rank 5 universal ability, or that you can “save” upgrade points and buy extra high-level abilities)
I think we are in agreement, then. The end that I was trying to meet (albeit poorly) was that whatever build a player would want to use would be based on their own playstyle, rather than some objective paradigm of efficiency, since most of the abilities we have seen thus far are not just simple buffs.
Ah, didnt get you there then 
Was wondering tho but based on our recent discussion I thought you went negative anyway, meh I hate the empirical way of thinking…
I can’t tell if that was a typo, or if you’re accusing me of being a sockpuppet of LyndonL. If so, I’m… I’m so sorry that I’ve made you feel that way.
I still think that removing skill trees somewhat eliminates “optimal” builds.
Sure, if you wanted to min/max you could sit down and figure out the tactical use of every skill, and then tune your playstyle to the skills.
What if, instead, each person picked the skills that suit their style, building on their personal strengths, rather than the strengths built into the game.
Sure, the EMP nade might be a really strong skill, but if you happen to be really good at knocking out turrets via other means, there’s less reason for you to get it.
Shooting grenades might be a really good skill for tactics, but only if you use nades often.
Having skills be entirely independent of each other means that there is no forced progression. When you are forced to pick one of 3 first tier skills in order to move on to second tier, that contains the skill you REALLY want, it removes a lot of choice. Its no longer a question of “what ability is the best for me”, it becomes “which of these three is best for me”. Comparing one skill to three will be min/maxed more than comparing one skill to 10 or 20.
I feel it is mainly these restrictions that cause the parallel builds you see in other games.
Edit: Lack of skill trees also gives people more freedom to deviate from the norm. Taking an odd skill only costs one skill point, rather than having to invest into an entire skill tree.